Viktor Vaughn wrote:
Wow, that sounds dramatic. The article you linked to says a majority of the 500 jobs will stay here.

There haven't been any promises made and the article clearly states, "The company said it “will retain a strong regional presence in Minneapolis” but didn’t specify whether there will be job cuts in Minnesota." Who knows how the situation will play out, but it's safe to assume it will turn out like every other post merger - job cuts.

Viktor Vaughn wrote:
Really?! doesn't this area have the lowest unemployment rate of any metropolitan area? Aren't we known having among the best wage / cost of living ratio in the nation?

Yes. Really. I have a friend who works for Greater MSP and has told me that the TC's image is not as positive among outside business leaders as you or I think it is. Having the lowest unemployment rate, great wages, etc... is clearly helping the metro attract new headquarters.

Viktor Vaughn wrote:
Net company loss? Is this statistic true or just how it seems to you?

I will see if I can find any info regarding this.

Viktor Vaughn wrote:
How much should we pay corporations to keep jobs in Minnesota? How much should we subsidize each job to move here from elsewhere? Other states are known to pay millions for a few hundred low-wage jobs with no benefits. Some states have no income tax. Do you really think we should compete with the other states with give-a-ways and a free ride? Minnesota needs to focus on being a great place to live and leave the race to the bottom to the desperate.

Hopefully, the moocher class will gravitate to other places. I'm not talking about poor people trying to scrape together a life; I'm talking about those who think the rest of us need to pool our money to fill up the gas tank on their Lear Jet. Maybe the successful people that stay here will realize they did well because they're fortunate enough to be part of a civil society, with roads, schools, public safety, a functioning legal system -- all things that cost money. Maybe if the moochers leave, we would have a civic minded business community once again.

The transaction would probably be structured as a tax inversion, with Medtronic using Smith & Nephew’s corporate shell to move its legal residence to the U.K., the people said. The gap between the 35 percent federal tax rate and much lower levies in some European countries is spurring such deals -- including Pfizer Inc. (PFE)’s now shelved effort to acquire AstraZeneca Plc. (AZN) The U.K. has a 21 percent corporate income tax rate.

Medtronic’s Chief Executive Officer Omar Ishrak has said he wouldn’t rule out a tax-inversion deal.

“Strategically, we do have this current problem that we have a lot of cash outside the U.S.,” he said in a May 20 telephone interview. “We encourage some kind of U.S. tax reform that allows us access to that cash in a more reasonable way.”

Medtronic already has a presence in Watford, UK part of greater London. I suppose they'll wait til Earl Bakken passes to move the whole ship, though he lives in HI full time now.

Whew! thanks for the update, that gave me a scare. We should always remember that for all the things like stadiums, super-tall towers, local restaurants and light rail, it all comes undone without the high-paying office jobs that feed the system.

MSPumpkins wrote:So does this count as us losing another Fortune 500 company?

Yep.

If the US government doesn't reduce corporate taxes and simplify the tax code, we are going to see more and more U.S. companies move their headquarters overseas. Medtronic has been the largest company to relocate overseas and their move has essentially opened the floodgates for other large companies to do so.